Hell quizzes : to a street preacher

Booklet No. 6

CATHOLIGETIC SUBJECTS
BAFFLING TO CONVERTS

Catholigetics is a word concocted to
BETTER express the idea of Catholic
apologetics. Catholic apologetics W
Catholigetics is the theological science
which aims at explaining and justifying
religious doctrine in order to show its
reasonableness in .answer to objections
to those who deny the reasonableness of
any religion, especially the Catholic
religion. Theologians prefer today to
call the science fundamental theology,
which explains the grounds of religion,
revelation, and Catholicity.

The subject matter of this series of
booklets on Catholigetics has been
gathered from the Radio experience of
Rev. Dr. L. Rumble, M.S.C., Sydney,
Australia, and from the Street Preach¬
ing experience of Rev. C. M. Carty,
director of Campaigners for Christ, St.

Paul, Minn., U. S. A.

One or two of these booklets can be
mailed to friends in a Ic wrapper or in
a Ic unsealed envelope.

♦

IMPRIMATUR Die 18a Januarii, 1939

Joannes Gregorius Murray

Archiepiscopus Sancti Pauli

HELL QUIZZES TO A STREET
PREACHER

All around us today we hear non-Catholics declaring
that, “There is no Hell,” “Hell is a myth,” “Intellectual
progress has abolished Hell.” Prof. G. H. Betts, of the
Northwestern University in his book “The Belief of
700 Ministers,” shows in his tabulations of replies re¬
ceived from 500 ministers and 200 Protestant theological
schools, in 20 denominations that 13 per cent were
uncertain of Hell’s existence, and 34 per cent disbe¬
lieved or denied the existence of Hell. As a conclu¬
sion to his findings he says, “No denomination except
perhaps the Lutherans has any right to demand that
fixed creeds shall be taught their young.”

The following questions and statements to a radio
and street preacher are samples of what the so-called
Reformation has done for the modern mind:

1. I don’t like Hell.

Who does like Hell? The fact that you don’t like
Hell doesn’t prove that it is all humbug. Diderot, a
rationalist, set down in his notes a little self-interroga¬
tion, “If you abuse your reason, my soul, you will
not only be unhappy in this life, but still more un¬
happy in Hell.”

“And who told you that there is a Hell?”

“Well, even if it be doubtful, you had better live
as if there were one.”

“What if I am sure there is no Hell?”

“I defy you to prove it.”

Voltaire replied in the same strain to a friend who
wrote to him, “I believe that I have at last found cer¬
tainty that no Hell exists at all.”

“Lucky man,” wrote back Voltaire, “I am very far
yet from that.”

Still, many people choose not to believe in Hell, and
in order to pat themselves on the back to give them¬
selves confidence they assert no one really believes
that ancient doctrine of priestcraft. There are 431,000,-
000 members of the Catholic Church who believe that
ancient but still modern doctrine,

2. What do you mean by Hell?

Though the modernized man jokes about Hell, scoffs
at it, doubts and denies it. Hell is the eternal lot of
misery awaiting those who die in a state of grave sin
and at enmity with God. Before the general resurrec¬
tion, the soul alone experiences this misery; after the
resurrection, the body will be reunited with that soul
and will share in the misery, being tormented by
created elements even as the person forsook God during

2

GENUINE BELIEF IN HELL

life for the enjoyment of created things. The chief
misery will be the sense of having lost happiness of
the Vision of God; the other will be the torment of fire.

3. If you believe in Hell, you believe that it is neces¬
sary for others, but not for yourselves.

No Catholic believes that anyone necessarily goes
to Hell. No man need go there at all. But if a man
separates himself from God by sin and dies in a state
of mortal or grave sin, he has fixed his state forever
and will go to Hell; and this is truth which every
Catholic admits as applicable to himself as well as to
all other human beings.

4. Catholics cannot genuinely believe in Hell.

Catholics genuinely believe in the existence of Hell.

I believe in it and I have not the most attenuated
shadow of a doubt as to the existence of Hell. Nor has
any other practical Catholic in this world. Pope,
Cardinals, Bishops, priests and laymen all have this
same faith, and sincerely.

5. No sane intellect could assimilate so horrible a
doctrine.

Sane reason does not demand unbelief. Human in¬
telligence cannot fully comprehend the mystery of
eternal suffering, but that does not alter the fact that
Hell exists, even as our not fully comprehending the
medium of wireless transmission does not alter the
fact that some such medium does exist. And if the
thought of Hell is horrible, the thought that there is
no Hell is still more horrible. Grave sin against the
Creator is a more horrible thing than the Hell to which
it leads. And that a creature could mock its Creator
with impunity is more horrible than the punishment
such conduct deserves.

6. Catholics must hate the doctrine of Hell.

They do not hate the doctrine of Hell, for they love
the truth as revealed by God. Then, too, this doctrine
is the vindication of God’s justice, and it is not possible
to hate the doctrine that God is justice itself. Cath¬
olics dislike the state of Hell of course; and hate the
thought of anyone going there. But the doctrine they
gladly accept.

7. No wonder Catholics live by fear, whilst Protest¬
ants have such childlike love and trust in God.

What do you mean by “fear”? Do you mean servile,
cringing fear, or that filial reverent fear which Scrip¬
ture declares to be the beginning of wisdom? And
what do you mean by “childlike love and trust”? Do
you mean the repeating of the formula, “Believe in

CATHOLICISM WITHOUT A HELL

3

Christ and be saved,” and then going on with all kinds
of things which God forbids? With hosts of Protestants,
“childlike love and trust” are matters of vague senti¬
ment and self-persuasion, due to ignorance even of
God’s just demands and revealed doctrines. As, for
example, when Protestant clergymen say to their
people, “There is not really a Hell. No one can tell
me that there is really a Hell.” Why do they preach
about Heaven and have they been really informed
about Heaven? And, although God does tell us that
there is a Hell, their poor people clutch at the thought
fathered by their wish and regard it as childlike love
and trust to deny what God has revealed. Finally, re¬
member that real filial and reverent fear of God, such
as is instilled into Catholics, in no way excludes
genuine love of God and trust in Him. These are the
true wisdom to which filial fear leads.

8. I admire Catholicism but I could never sincerely
believe in Hell.

You could, if you had the faith which Catholics
possess, namely, that the Catholic Church, which
teaches this doctrine, has the commission, protection
and authority of God, in matters of religion and moral
conduct, to teach, guide, and rule the souls of men.

9. Could one become a Catholic without believing
in Hell?

No. But you really make an impossible supposition.
He who refuses to believe in any one authoritative
teaching of Christianity could not possibly have perfect
faith in any others. He might have immense confi¬
dence in his own opinion as to their truth. But that
is not Christian faith. He believes the other doctrines
because he likes them, and refuses to believe this be¬
cause he does not approve of it. That is not Christian
faith. Faith accepts a thing as true on the authority
of another.

If I have faith in Christ, I believe that He knows
the truth and would not tell a lie. Whatever He says
I accept — whether I fully comprehend it or not because
refusal to accept accuses Him of ignorance or want of
veracity or want of authority. Deny any one thing
Christ teaches and you deny faith in His knowledge
and authority to teach. That motive having gone
overboard, what do you accept?

You accept, not by faith in Christ or in His Church,
but through confidence in your own powers of discern¬
ment. That might do, if you wish to be a disciple
of yourself; but it will not do as a qualification to be
a disciple of Christ and of the Catholic Church. It is

4

NATURE OF HELL

all or nothing. If a man has Catholic faith, he accepts
the teaching of the Catholic Church. If he will not
accept her teaching, he has not received the gift of
Catholic faith, and cannot become a Catholic until he
does so.

10. What is the nature of Hell?

Hell is a state of eternal misery. Death in Hell
would be a great mercy, only there is no death. There
is but suffering, and an unending suffering in Hell.
It is a departure from all that is good, holy, and
beautiful. The misery of the privation of God is in
proportion to the joy of the possession of God. The lost
soul goes to remorse, suffering, and despair. There
will be the remorse of eternal remembrance; not re¬
pentance, but consuming regret and degradation;
regret that he should have to suffer thus; the degra¬
dation of his identification with sin. He is not so
much in the act of sin as in the state of sin. Sin is,
as it were, humanized in him. And consciousness of
sin will come into its own. First sins bring fear and
remorse to the timorous, shy, and pure conscience of
a child. But men grow out of their conscience, and
live it down. But what if the child conscience could
knock at the heart of the grown man? And what if
conscience were revived, and a man could get rid of
neither his sins nor his conscience for all eternity? We
can at least conceive of a mental Hell based on such
a consideration.

But there is also a physical Hell of fire. There is a
fire of Hell. It is not fire as we know it, for it is worse.
Fire as we know it was but the nearest thing Christ
could find to describe the sense-pains of Hell. And
the soul will go to this remorse and suffering in utter
despair. Our future is attractive so long as there is
hope of some sort. If hope goes, there is only the
despair of suicide. Only in Hell there is no suicide. “I
am lost forever,” is the conclusive cry of a soul, made
for happiness, yet never to attain it.

11. It is simply impossible. It cannot be.

We must believe in such a Hell, or give up being
Christians. If there is an up, there must be a down; if
there is a right, there must be a left; if there is reward,
there must be punishment; if there is a Heaven, there
must be a Hell. If we reject Hell, we reject the au¬
thority of God, reject the redemption and the cross;
and, indeed, the whole majestic edifice of Christian
faith, the source of life and true civilization, the one
divine religion in this world today.

PROOF THAT HELL EXISTS

5

12. What evidence have you that such a Hell exists?

The very best. The God who made us tells us

that He also has made a Hell. There is a Hell in
which both the bodies and the souls of the lost will be
afflicted. Thus the gentle Christ Himself warns us, “It
is expedient for thee that one of thy members should
perish rather than that thy whole body go into Hell.”
Matt. V, 30. Remember that all shall rise some day,
the good and bad alike, the body sharing in the fate of
the soul. “All that are in the graves shall hear the
voice of the Son of God. And they that have done
good things shall come forth unto the resurrection of
life; but they that have done evil unto the resurrection
of judgment.” Jn. V., 29. Those who are lost will go
to everlasting fire. Christ called it “Unquenchable fire.”
Mk. IX., 44. He tells us of the grim sentence, “Depart
from me you cursed into everlasting fire which was
prepared for the devil and his angels.” Matt. XXV., 41.
Such a solemn utterance of the judicial sentence de¬
mands the literal sense. Judges do not speak in met¬
aphors at such moments. “Let him be hanged — but of
course only metaphorically.” And it will be conscious
sufTering. Our Lord says, “Their worm dieth not, and
the fire is not extinguished.” Mk. IX., 43. And again.
“There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Matt.
XIII., 50. Continued conscious suffering is the fate of
the lost. And reason demands such fate. When a
man sins gravely, he chooses between God and a thing
forbidden by God. He cannot have both, and he pre¬
fers to renounce God rather than the created good.
If he dies without repentance his will is still alienated
from God. He would do the same thing again if he
got the chance. And as long as these dispositions last,
he must do without God and happiness. These dispo¬
sitions lasting forever once this probationary life is
over, so will the penalty.

13. 1 have read my Bible twice from cover to cover
and I find nothing about your horrible doctrine.

When you read your Bible you must have read with
the pretense of a seeing blind man. Open your Bible
and examine this abundant testimony: Psalms X, 7,
XVII. 6. XX. 10, CXIV, 3; Judith XVI, 20-21; Job
XX, 18, 22, 26, XXI 13; Wisdom XVI 16-19; Ecclesiasticus
VII 19, XVI 7, XXI 10; Isaias V 4. XXVI 11, XXXIII
11-12, XLVII 14. LXV 5, LXVI 24; Jeremias XV 14;
Baruch IV 35; Ezekiel XV 6-7, XX 47; Matthew III
10. 12, V 22. 29. VII 19. X 28. XI 23. XIII 20. 42, 50.
XVIII 8-9, XXIII 33. XXV 41; Mark IX 42, 43, 44. 45. 46,
47. 48; Luke III 9. 17. X 15. XII 5, XVI 22; John XV 6;
II Peter III 7; Apocalypse XVII 16, XIX 20, XX 9, 14,
15. XXI 8.

6

CRUCIFIXION IS ALL NONSENSE

14. My reason absolutely rejects the idea of an eter¬
nal Hell.

Your reason may not be able to comprehend the full
import of the doctrine. But reason cannot refuse to
acknowledge a fact revealed by God. Reason itself
says that God must know, and that He could not reveal
falsehood. And reason itself should tell you that your
intelligence is given you that you may obey and serve
God, not to enable you to set yourself up as His judge.

15. But if I were God, I would never have made
a Hell.

If God were you, then. He might not have made
a Hell. But God is not you. He is God. What you
would do is no indication of what God must neces¬
sarily do. Even if you look round the world you
do see, there are hundreds of things which do not
meet with your approval. Yet God has permitted them.
And if you are so far out in the world you do see,
what certainty have you that your ideas of what the
next world should be like have any more value?

16. This threat of Hell defeats its own object.

The warning that there is a Hell does not defeat its
own object amongst those with a right idea of the truth
that it does exist, yet that it is a mystery the
full understanding of which is reserved to God. Human
attempts to picture Hell are symbolical, and give no
adequate ideas of the reality. Nor is anyone asked to
concentrate thought upon his own imagined and very
often false estimates of what Hell is like. We know
that a state of very great and eternal misery is a fact,
and a possibility for us. And a man is a fool if he
does not think of the fact that persistent rejection of
God merits eternal rejection by God.

17. Why preach this Hell business?

Why do you preach, “Jesus Saves,” “Put on Jesus,”
“Believe on Jesus.” From what does He save except
from Hell? Wouldn’t Jesus Christ, in whose crucifixion
you believe, be a fool to have come down from Heaven
only to go up upon the cross to die such a horrible
death? The crucifixion is all nonsense if there be
no Hell, from which we are to be saved. Certainly
if there be no Hell from which we are to be saved,
men could not go there, and we would all eventually
get to Heaven, whether He died or not.

18. The Hebrew word Hell “Sheol” has no other
meaning than the grave.

In Hebrew “sheol” has a very wide significance, and
can refer to any state of being less than Heaven. It

EVERLASTING

7

can mean grave, underworld, kingdom of the dead,
state of the eternally lost, etc. The correct sense must
be discerned from the context. This is often the case
with Hebrew, which is a language with a very limited
vocabulary having single words with many separate
meanings rather than separate words for almost every
shade of thought. The context rules out any possi¬
bility of Hell being no more than the grave. Christ
speaks of a fate for men which involves “unquenchable
fire,” where remorse does not die, and the fire is not
extinguished. No one but a fool could call Our Lord’s
words a suitable description of the grave. The grave
is the receptacle of lifeless bodies. Jesus also declares
that the Hell with which He threatens the wicked is
that “prepared for the devil and his angels.” The devil
never had a body, nor was he buried in a grave. Nor
can the words “everlasting fire” constitute a reference
to the grave. Hell is everlasting, and will be experi¬
enced by the lost as a curse and a blight upon their
unending existence.

19. Has not the word “everlasting” been mistrans¬
lated?

It has not. When Christ said that the wicked will go
into “everlasting punishment,” the Greek word used is
exactly the same as that used to describe “everlasting”
happiness and the “everlasting” God. Efforts to put
limits to the duration of Hell would put limits to the
duration of Heaven, and even to the very existence of
God. As long as God is God, Hell will be Hell, with
all its miseries.

20. Can reason accept the idea that the Saints, who
should give us good example, find part of their pleasure
in seeing the tortures of the damned?

No. The exact condition of the Saints in Heaven
is a mystery to us whilst still in this life. But if you
study their own lives on earth, their heroic virtues will
afford you all the good example you could wish. Mean¬
time. the sufferings of the lost, as sufferings, do not
contribute to their happiness. The positive aspect of
God’s justice maintained does so.

21. Do you maintain that there is a real fire in Hell?

Yes. ’Tlie fire of Hell is a real and created fire, physi¬
cal but not material, which wdll affect even the bodies
of men w'ho die at enmity with God. I grant that it
will differ in various characteristics from natural fire
as we know it. Christ chose the W'ord fire as being
that element best knowm to us which produces results
most similar to the effects of the fire of Hell. Yet fire
as we know it depends upon combustion. The fire of

8

WHAT KIND OF FIRE?

Hell will not depend upon being constantly fed with
fuel, but upon God’s will, the principle of all existing
things. If God can will that fire should exist with the
aid of fuel to which He gave its properties. He cer¬
tainly can produce and conserve fire by simply willing
it, and without the aid of created fuel. Thus He
manifested to Moses a bush in flames yet unconsumed.

And if that fire were not real, it would be absurd to
speak of consigning men to it. Christ’s solemn utter¬
ance of a judicial sentence demands the literal sense.
Judges do not speak in metaphors at such moments,
saying, “Let him be hanged, but, of course, only meta¬
phorically.’’

22. What is the nature of this fire in Hell?

The nature of the fire which will torment the lost
is not of very great importance. Nor can difficulties
concerning its nature prove the doctrine of Hell wrong.
That we have difficulties proves no more than that we
have them, and that is not in the least surprising when
another world is being discussed on a basis of ideas
drawn from this world. I grant that, although the fire
of Hell is real, it must differ in nature from earthly
fire as we know it, and that in many v/ays. The fire
of Hell is a created reality, which Christ made known
to us by choosing that element which in our experience
produces results most similar to the effects of the fire
of HeU.

23. If the soul alone is sent to Hell after death, could
such a “real fire” roast that soul?

It is evident that it afflicts the devil, who is
a purely spiritual being. “Everlasting fire,” said
Christ, “which was prepared for the devil and his
angels,” He was obviously referring to a real agent
of suffering distinct from the devil and his angels. Of
course, a spiritual being cannot be roasted as one roasts
a chicken. But there is nothing to prevent a spiritual
being from experiencing mental apprehension and ac¬
tual physical pain by a created environment restricting
its activities and restraining it from attaining to the
possession of the happiness for which it was made.
Whatever the explanation, however, the fact stands.
God has told us that there is a Hell. It is no argu¬
ment against Hell to say, “I do not understand it.”
The only possible argument would be the proof that
God never did reveal the doctrine. That proof no man
will ever be able to produce.

24. Heb. II, 14, tells us that the Devil is to be de¬
stroyed. Who then will keep the fire of Hell going?

The text means that Christ will destroy the power
of the devil over the souls of the redeemed. Satan

HOW MANY IN HELL?

9

will never be personally destroyed. And in any case
he does not keep the fire of Hell going. If Satan had
anything to do with it, that fire would have been
destroyed long ago. He has never enjoyed it. However,
the torments of Hell are dependent upon the will of
God.

25. Will this lire also aflBict the bodies of the lost?

After the general resurrection, yes. Christ has said,

"All that are in the grave shall hear the voice of the
Son of God. And they that have done good things
shall come forth into the resurrection of life; but they
that have done evil, unto the resurrection of judgment.”
(Jn. V., 28-29.) So all shall rise, good and bad alike,
men’s bodies sharing in the fate of the soul. And in
Mt. V., 29, Christ says, grimly, not jokingly, "It is
expedient for thee that one of thy members should
perish rather than that thy whole body be cast into
Hell.” The whole man, body and soul, will either be
saved, to experience the happiness of the glorified and
risen Christ, or lost, to experience the miseries of Hell.
Some people have the happy little habit of believing in
Heaven because they like it, and denying Hell because
they don’t like it. But the Catholic Church teaches
what Christ taught, because Christ taught it. The un¬
comfortable parts of Christ’s teachings are not untrue
because uncomfortable.

26. How many souls are lost according to the Cath¬
olic Church?

Various theologians have expressed various opinions.
But these are merely private opinions. The Catholic
Church has no official teaching on the subject, nor has
any definite information been revealed to men by God.
The one thing certain is that men can be saved and
men can be lost, and that unrepented mortal sin is the
deciding factor. That is enough for all practical pur¬
poses. Yet some of the Scriptural texts show us that
the number of the saved, though great, is small in
comparison with the lost. Mt. 20, 16, "Many are called,
but few chosen.” Mt. 7, 13-14, “Wide is the gate and
broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many
there are who go in thereat. How narrow is the gate
and straight is the way that leadeth to Life; and few
there are that find it.” Lu. 13, 24. "Strive to enter by
the narrow gate; for many, I say to you, shall seek to
enter, and shall not be able.” 1 C., 9, 24-25, "Know you
not that they that run in the race, all run indeed, but
one receiveth the prize? So run that you may obtain.
And everyone that striveth for the mastery refraineth
himself from all things; and they indeed that they may
receive a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible
one.”

10

WINNING INTELLECTUALS

27. Your Church will have increasing difficulty in
getting intelligent men to believe in Hell.

The stream of converts from the ranks of intelligent
men is sufficient answer to that suggestion. If you
think the Catholic Church is the Church of the super¬
stitious and ignorant, then examine this partial list of
the many brilliant minds in the literary field alone,
who have become converts to the Catholic Church:

Paul Claudel, Sheila Kay-Smith, David Goldstein,
Sigrid Undset, G. K. Chesterton, Compton Mackkenzie,
Alfred Noyes, Joyce Kilmer, F. Marion Crawford,
Giovanni Papini, Johannes Jorgensen, Maurice Baring,
Theodore Maynard, Ronald Knox, Sir Bertram Windle,
Shane Leslie, Max Pemberton, John L. Stoddard, Au¬
brey de Vere, Robert Hugh Benson, Coventry Patmore,
“Artemus Ward,” Joel Chandler Harris, Michael Wil¬
liams, Rose Hawthorne, “John Ayscough,” Henry Har-
land, C. C. Martindale, Robert H. Lord, Cecil Chester¬
ton, Selden P. Delany, Charles Warren Stoddard, Isabel
Clarke, "Wilfred Meynell, Enid Dennis, John Moody,
Owen Dudley, Kent Stone, etc., etc.

In one category of 3,000 American converts 372 were
Protestant ministers, 115 doctors, 126 lawyers, 45 former
members of Congress, 12 governors of states, 180 Army
and Navy Officers, and 206 authors, musicians and per¬
sons of cultural prominence. These figures were taken
from “Our Sunday "Visitor.”

28. How can you reconcile Hell with God’s love,
justice, and mercy?

If I could not, that would but prove something wrong
with my own ideas on the subject. For it is certain
that God is loving, just, and merciful; and He has
revealed that there is a Hell. So the ideas cannot be
repugnant. However God’s love, justice, and mercy
demand that there be a Hell. His love demands a Hell,
for the more He loves the more He must hate sin. To
the man who says that God loves too much to send a
man to Hell, I simply reply that He sends no man
there; men go there. And God has loved too much
not to let them go there if they scorn, reject, and throw
God’s love back in His face. Again, His justice de¬
mands that if a man dies rejecting an infinite goodness
he should endure a penalty of a never-ending nature.
If there were no eternal punishment, a man could cry
to God, “You say, ‘Thou shalt not.’ I say, ‘I shall.’ Do
Your worst. You cannot punish me forever. What care
I for Your commandments or for Yourself! You must
either make me happy in the end, or annihilate me,
when I shall have escaped Your power.” It is impos¬
sible for the drama of iniquity to end like that. That

MERCY AND JUSTICE

11

would not be justice. And as for God’s mercy, already
it is a mercy that man has the thought of Hell as an
emergency brake to stop his headlong rush into vice.
The truth that there is a Hell has mercifully saved
many a soul from a life of blasphemy and sin, and still
more often from death in a state of sin. And remem¬
ber that God’s mercy is offered to every man over and
over again during life. Mercy is asked for, not forced
upon people. Some men who are loudest in their pro¬
tests against God’s injustice would be the first to com¬
plain if God forced anything upon them, even his
mercy. But men cannot have God’s mercy and reject
it at one and the same time.

29. Try as I may, I cannot reconcile the idea with
God’s mercy.

You can safely leave that problem to God. All your
speculations now will not alter conditions then. God
knows best, and you can be sure that whatever He dis¬
poses will be in keeping with all His attributes, and in
accordance with a far nobler and higher estimate of
God than any you can form in this life. And remem¬
ber that mercy is not foolishness. . As a matter of fact,
God offers His mercy over and over again to every
soul during life. This soul cannot persevere in reject¬
ing it, and have it. A man who leans upon God’s
mercy to deny the danger, and denies the danger in
order to offend God still more, is but making a mockery
of God’s most precious attribute. Do you want God to
forget that He is God, and plead forever with a crea¬
ture that depises and rejects Him? Is it possible for
the drama of iniquity to end like that? And if sin
has turned purity into filth, humility into pride, hope
into despair, and love into hate, what would such a soul
do in the presence of God? Hell is the only fit place
for it.

30. But Christ who came as the Revelation of God,
was so kind and gentle!

That intensifies the force of the arguments for Hell.
Only a grim reality could have forced Him to speak as
He did. He taught Heaven and Hell equally. You
cannot have Heaven because you like it and reject a
Hell taught by the same authority because you do not
like it. Think of His passion and death. If there were
no Hell to save us from; if w'e all had to go to Heaven
w'hether He were crucified or not, then His sufferings
and death were foolish. Men wish to abolish Hell.
There is but one way to do so. Let each man abolish
his own Hell by repenting of his sins and endeavoring
to serve God.

12

CRUELTY OF CHRIST

31. You make Christ cruel.

I do not. Due punishment for not doing as Christ
commands is justice, not cruelty. Parents know that
it is not cruelty to inflict reasonable and deserved
punishment upon children who are rebellious. And
God has more right to your obedience than any parents
to the obedience of their children. It is a blameworthy
weakness in parents if they allow their children to
do just as they please with no fear of the consequences.
And God is not so foolish as to give serious laws to
His rational creatures on the understanding that noth¬
ing will happen if they break them. But there is no
need to endure the extreme penalty. Keep the laws
and you will keep safe.

32. Your Hell is full of non-Catholics, who commit
grave sin and do not know how to make an act of
perfect contrition.

We do not know how far they understand the gravity
of sin. As for the act of contrition, you are leaving
out the greatest factor of all — God’s grace. In a flash
God can enlighten the mind and move the will to a
purely interior act of contrition of which the on¬
lookers know nothing. And God alone knows how
many are thus saved.

33. If you believe in Christianity you must believe
that there are infinitely more people in Hell than in
Heaven.

I have not to believe that, and I do not believe it.
Yet I believe in Christianity. Why should you, a non-
Christian, prescribe for me what I have to believe?
You might at least leave that to Christians.

34. Are Judas and Adam in Hell?

It has never been revealed that any particular soul
is in Hell. Christ said of Judas, “Better for him had
he never been born. Matt. XXVI, 24. That does not look
too hopeful in his case, for no matter what a man has
to endure, if he attains eternal happiness in the end,
much better for him to have been born. However, even
of Judas, no man has absolute certainty. The question
can be solved only by God. It is practically certain
that Adam is in Heaven, and not in Hell. Thus Scrip¬
ture says, “Wisdom preserved him that was formed by
God, the father of the world . . . and brought him out
of his sin.” Wisd. X, 1-2. Adam was the type of the
second Adam, Christ, and it is to be expected that
Christ, the second Adam, would see to it that the first
Adam was fully liberated from Satan. The Greek
Church from very ancient times, has celebrated the
feast of Adam and Eve.

HELL ON EARTH

13

35. Why does the Church offer us Hell when we
have Hell on earth?

The Church offers Hell to no one. She does all she
can to prevent people from going there. Meantime Hell
is not in this life. Those in Hell are irrevocably lost,
and no one is irrevocably lost while still in this life.
Until his very last breath every man has the oppor¬
tunity offered him to save his soul. Nor are the ills
and sufferings of this life Hell. They are often a very
good medicine, curing us of overattachment to this
earthly life. Again, Christ our Lord endured more
bitter sufferings during life than others are called upon
to endure, and in no way could He be regarded as
experiencing contact with Hell.

36. Where is Hell?

It is a state of suffering awaiting men after death,
if they fail to depart this life in the grace and friend¬
ship of God. Information concerning its locality has
not been revealed in terms of longitude and latitude,
even could such terms avail. God has revealed that
there is a Hell, but not where it is. And the latter
information is immaterial, nor can any argument be
based upon its absence. If the cables reported an
earthquake at Potosi, your ignorance of the locality
of Potosi would not disprove the earthquake. Our not
knowing where Hell is makes no difference whatever
to Hell. God has told us that it is a reality and that
a man is a fool who does not fulfill the conditions
necessary to avoid it.

37. Modern progressive scientific theology has no
time for Hell.

The idea that there is no Hell is neither progressive
nor scientific. It is not progressive, for it is not prog¬
ress to leave people ignorant of a chasm yawning be¬
neath their feet. If to take the truth from people and
leave them in error be progress, then only could you
call this progress. Nor is it scientific. TTiere is not
a jot of evidence that there is no eternal Hell, whilst
God says that there is one. The men who deny Hell
go by their feelings, shutting their eyes to facts. No
scientist does that. I feel that there ought not to be
a cancer. But there is a cancer.

38. Many pretend to believe and are hypocrites.

Very few would pretend to believe in Hell. An
immense number pretend to themselves that they do
not believe, and they do so in order to carry on as
tranquilly as possible in evil conduct. Those who want
to suppress Hell are not characterized by a real desire

14

BEING PLEASED WITH HELL

to defend the honor of God, to be more scrupulous
in the observance of His laws, and to be more faithful
in the fulfillment of their duties.

39. Believers’ lives must be overshadowed by stu- .
pendous horror!

There is no reason why that should be at all. They
have only to repent of their sins sincerely and resolve
to avoid grave violations of conscience, which alone
can lead to Hell. It is the man who does those things
which God strictly forbids who has reason to be over¬
shadowed, and even he by the horror of his conduct
chiefiy, and secondarily, by the prospect of the fate
such conduct deserves.

40. Where this terrible dogma does not embitter
happiness, it destroys character.

That is a gratuitous assertion. I believe in Hell.
Since it exists I would much rather know than not
know. And the knowledge does not embitter my hap¬
piness. As for my corrupt character, you at least have
not sufficient evidence to judge me on that point.

41. If I could rob people of their faith in Hell I
should not feel any regret.

That is because you do not understand the Christian
religion, nor the nature of the eternal moral law. Hell
exists, and since it does exist, it is treason to the God
of truth and treachery to man to try to blind men to
the fact.

42. Treachery to man! Are you pleased to know
that there is a Hell?

Since there is one, I am glad to know it. .1 do not
want to think that there is not a Hell if there is one.
And I am glad that there is a Hell. I am glad that
the state has penalties attached to the breaking of its
laws. If there were no such penalties, its laws would
fail to preserve the peace and well-being of the com¬
munity as they should. In the same way I am glad
that God has a deterring penalty attached to the viola¬
tion of His Commandments.

43. Is your desire of Hell for your fellowmen due
to your humanitarian sentiment or to the effete doctrine
of your infallible Church?

I do not desire Hell for my fellowmen. I desire to
save them from it. A truly humanitarian sentiment
makes me glad that evil conduct is not a matter of
indifference. It would be a dreadful thing if all men
thought that they could sin with impunity. Your talk
of an effete doctrine of an infallible Church is absurd.

MOTHER IN HEAVEN— SON IN HELL 15

44. I am human, and I can’t believe in a burning
Hell, above all for souls Christ came to redeem.

I cannot believe that Christ came to redeem people
if there be no Hell from which to redeem them. But
beware of your imagination. If you imagine a Hell
which is in any way opposed to the justice and love
of God, that is not the Hell you are asked to believe
in at all. God is just, merciful, and truthful. He says
that there is a Hell, and you are asked to believe in
the Hell which He knows to exist, not in any vague
.speculation of your own as to its nature. Hell is as
much a mystery of faith as is grace, and you are asked
to believe in the fact of Hell because God knows the
truth and could not tell an untruth. You are not
asked to comprehend fully its nature, and your in¬
ability to believe in the Hell you imagine does not
mean that you are unable to believe in the Hell which
God created for “the devil and his angels.”

45. How could a mother be happy in Heaven with
her child in Hell?

She could not w^ere her view of things limited by
her present inadequate ideas. But with an unclouded
view of what really constitutes goodness and of what
really constitutes evil, she will have very different
estimates in Heaven which will render happiness not
only possible but a fact. Let us try to grasp it. Hell
being a fact, our lack of understanding makes no
difference. And in any case, Christ loved the child
more than did the mother herself, yet He is happy in
Heaven. So there must be some way out. You see,
we cannot interpret Heaven in terms of this life. Here
we are natural beings, our natural love directly awak¬
ened by our fellow beings. But in Heaven God Him¬
self will be the direct object of our love. We shall
love God, what God loves, and as God loves. All other
beings will be loved in God. Thus Christ said concern¬
ing the difference of human love in Heaven that mar¬
riage shall not exist, but that men will be “as the
angels of God in Heaven.” Matt, xxii., 30. Merely
natural love will change to supernatural love in and
through God, and people will be lovable insofar as
they resemble God. If a son dies unrepentant, having
identified himself with wickedness, then he will be the
opposite of God. The mother will experience an abso¬
lute necessity to love God who is pure, just, holy, and
truth itself. And she will find complete happiness in
doing so. Her natural love for her son gives way to a
supernatural love for him if he is pure, just, holy and
truthful. But it gives way to her love for God if her
child is impure, unjust, wicked and essentially a liar,
as is the father of lies himself. Her transfer to Heaven

16

CONDEMNING WEAK PEOPLE

has changed her reasons for loving her son, and if he
dies in such evil dispositions she has no supernatural
reason to love him.

All her happiness is in God, and that happiness can¬
not be disturbed. This may sound difficult. It must.
For we are trying to explain conditions of Heaven
by ideas drawn from our earthly experience, ideas
which do not go far enough. The explanation gives a
solution as far as the limited mind of man can go.
And if it astonishes human reason, we should be more
astonished still if our limited powers could fully grasp
the matter.

46. Is any person so bad as to deserve eternal pun¬
ishment?

Yes. The man who deliberately and finally despises
and rejects the Infinite Love of God deserves to be
deprived of it forever.

47. Surely he did some virtuous actions. Are they
to be of no avail?

They would have counted for very much, had the
man wished. But if he subsequently commits mortal
sin and dies without repenting of it he forfeits any
benefits of previous virtue. Refraining from adultery
on Friday is no excuse for the commission of murder
on Saturday.

48. You damn people whose wills are so weak that
they cannot avoid sin.

None but deliberately willed and unrepented mortal
sin meets with eternal punishment. If inherent weak¬
ness is so great as to destroy real responsibility, God
would not accuse man of mortal sin. But such is,' not
the case with the normal man. The normal man is
able to refuse consent of the will to evil inclinations
and suggestions. Some people are only too ready to
call their own cowardice inherent weakness. They
could have refused to sin, and afterwards fell back
on the lame excuse of “weak moments.”

49. However bad people may be, I think it is against
the right ideas of God to speak of His punishing any¬
one forever.

Then what are you going to do with Satan? He is
a creature of God even as we. Is he going to reform?
Will he ever come out of the eternal fire prepared for
the devil and his angels? No. And granting the fact
that God is punishing one of His creatures like that,
responsible human souls can certainly meet with the
same fate. I do not like the thought of anyone suf-

MONSTROUS INJUSTICE

17

fering in Hell any more than you do. But that will
not make me deny the existence of Hell. Hundreds
of things we do not like are facts.

50. That any human being should be sent to such
a Hell of misery as you have described seems to me
a monstrous injustice.

Far from its being an injustice, justice demands a
Hell. All law has a sanction, and, to be efficacious, the
sanction must be proportionate to the malice of the
criminal. “No sanction, no law,” is an axiom. It is
absurd to say, “You must do this,” if you have to
reply to the query, “What if I do not, what will hap¬
pen?” by weakly saying, “Oh, nothing!” Justice is
a principle. Human justice demands sanctions. Flaunt
the law; deliberately take somebody’s life, and the
due penalty is incurred. But if human justice fails
to apprehend a criminal, God will not fail to balance
the scales of justice. Then, too, many crimes against
the law of God, and against conscience, are outside
human jurisdiction. But God is not mocked. And
serious, unrepented sin will meet with the irrevocable
penalty of an eternal living death. The soul, immortal
of its very nature, cannot but survive; and it will
live on forever either as the friend of God or at
enmity with God. But consider the position. God
manifests His serious laws. If there be no eternal
retribution, a soul can cry to Him, “Oh, I know You
can punish me for a time, but even You will be obliged
to pardon me, to make me happy in the end. There’s
no eternal punishment. Then let it all come. I care
nothing for Your laws, nor shall I ever repent of having
flung down the gauntlet to You. Do Your worst. I’m
going to do as I like and pay no attention to any of
Your rights over me.” I simply ask, would justice be
satisfled if God had to pardon such a creature of His
own making? The compulsory pardon of such a crea¬
ture would be to lie at the thing’s feet, insulted and
trampled upon forever. No. Ju.stice demands eternal
retribution for those who knowingly and deliberately
flout God’s laws and choose not to repent of having
done so.

51. I still maintain that it ts unjust to be punished
eternally for a sin which occupied but a few moments.

In our own world life-sentences are given for crimes
of perhaps two minutes’ duration; and no one calls it
unjust. The punishment is not proportionate to the
time a sin takes, but to its gravity, malice and sheer
wickedness.

18

HELL FOR EATING MEAT ON FRIDAY

52. Where is this enormous gravity in eating meat on
Friday, which the Catholic Church regards as a mortal
sin? Hell for such a trifle is outrageous.

The soul would not be punished simply for the eating
of meat on Friday. It would be punished for violating
a grave law of the Catholic Church. The grave law
forbidding meat on Fridays takes its significance, not
from the thing forbidden, but from the divine authority
behind the law, and a deliberate defiance of the author¬
ity of God, certainly a mortal sin. It is a case of
radical obedience or disobedience. The law is that one
cannot have a given pleasure and the friendship of
God. If one says, “Well, I prefer this particular pleas¬
ure to the friendship of God,” takes the pleasure, and
dies without repenting, God can only say, “You can’t
reject my friendship and have it.” Christ said to the
Church, “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound
in Heaven.” Mt. XVIII, 18. Now, the Church binds
Catholics under pain of mortal sin not to eat meat on
Friday. Christ gave up His life in frightful suffering on
that day, and the Church commands Catholics, as an
act of grateful remembrance and in a spirit of obedi¬
ence, to give up the pleasure of taking meat. And as
Christ said of His Church, “He that hears you hears
Me, and he that despises you despises Me.” Lk. X, 16.
Catholics know that to despise the authority of their
Church in this matter is to despise Christ. You see,
you have not understood the real character of the sin.
To despise and reject Christ is to despise and reject
an infinite good. Infinite punishment is proportionate.

53. Do you mean to say that even sixty years of
sin would not be expiated by ten times sixty years of
suffering and misery?

If a man renounced his sins, repudiated his evil dis¬
positions, and turned to God in repentant love, much
less might suffice to wipe out his debts. All depends
upon the intensity with which he loves God at the
moment of death. A very great love of God can fully
expiate past sins. Thus Christ said, “Many sins are
forgiven her because she has loved much.” Lk. VII, 47.
And it is a fact that God has often been most tena¬
ciously loved by those who at one time offended him
most. But if a man dies in a state of grave and un¬
repented mortal sin, ten times sixty years would cer¬
tainly not suffice to wipe out his debt to God. He died
without renouncing his evil dispositions. His time of
probation is over. He dies identified with sin. He
neither can, nor does he wish to change. Did he get
the chance, he would commit the same sins again. His
malice is a persevering debt never expiated, but con¬
currently renewed in the midst of his suffering. A life

THE GOD OF GOODNESS

19

of sixty years in sin, taken by itself, could be expiated,
provided it had been repudiated, and the will were not
persevering in malicious opposition to God. But if a
man has never retracted his evil will, the debt can
never be wiped out. It’s not a* question of past sinful
actions over and done with. It’s a question of an ever¬
present disposition of malice irreconcilable with God.

54. Happily, for all your talk of a sufficient sanc¬
tion, our present emotions are too strong to be influ¬
enced by hazy thoughts of the next life.

As thousands of people resist strong emotional attrac¬
tions precisely because of their convictions concerning
the next life, your statement is untrue. Our emotions
are not too strong to allow us to be influenced by
thoughts of the next life. I grant that many people
refuse to think and ponder over the reality of the
next life and deliberately allow their emotions to sway
and even usurp the place of reason — not, however,
happily.

55. Your dry logic of just sanctions leaves me un¬
impressed. God is a God of goodness, love, and mercy.

God’s very goodness and love demand Hell for the
wicked, and mercy cannot be invoked on behalf of
one who deliberately rejects it. Part of God’s goodness
is His very justice. His perfections are in perfect
harmony and cannot contradict each other. In fact,
a denial of Hell is a denial of God’s goodness and
holiness. Were He less holy. Hell might not be eternal.
But the holier God is, the greater His aversion to sin.
His infinite love also demands Hell for those who reject
it. Love and hatred go together. If we are indifferent
to a thing, we do not resent its destruction. But the
more one loves good, the more one resents the evil
which would destroy the good. The divine spirit of
love is the everlasting reward of the holy yet the un¬
dying hatred which will forever enkindle the flames
of Hell. It is not so difficult to understand. When the
white light of the sun falls upon an object which ab¬
sorbs the light, it appears white. If it reflects some
of the light, it appears colored. So, when the love of
God bestows being upon a rational creature, if the will
absorbs all to itself and reflects none of that love to
the honor and glory of God. the soul renders itself
black in God’s sight, and His hatred is the result of
His very love. “If I exist at all,” the soul could say,
"it is because of God’s love. I cannot say why His
love wished me to exist, but I can say why He hates
me.” Let us remember, too, that the love of God
prompted the incarnation of His only-begotten Son.
the greatest act of love yet; and if sin was bad enough

20

GOD IS MORE CRUEL

to warrant the incarnation and death of the Son of
God, it is bad enough to warrant Hell for those who
despise the means offered for their redemption.

56. But I cannot bring myself to believe that a God
of love would condemn a soul to everlasting suffering.

In a way you are quite right, but not in the way
you think. A God of love supposes a God who does
love, and that supposes an object loved. If a soul is
the object of God’s love, that soul will not be con¬
demned to Hell. But God is good, and loves what is
good. Loving what is good. He must hate what is evil.
He, therefore, hates the moral evil called sin. That is
why He forbids sin. If, then, a soul identifies itself
with sin, it identifies itself with the object of God’s
hatred. There is no God of love for that soul whilst,
and insofar as, it clings to its evil dispositions. If a
soul dies without disassociating itself from evil by
repentance, it will go to Hell. But it is not sent there
by a God of love; it is rejected by the God of justice.
You seem to think that a God of love must love every¬
thing, whether good or evil. That is not true. God is
a God of love in the sense that He must love all that
is good. If I am good. He is a God of love to me. If
I am evil, I forfeit any claim to His love. As long as
we identify ourselves with that moral goodness which
God can love. He is a God of love to us, and we can¬
not be lost. In that sense, the God of love never con¬
demns a soul to everlasting punishment. But the evil
soul who forfeits God’s love will certainly meet with
that fate.

57. Don’t you think that cruelty is the most hateful
vice?

It is not the most hateful vice, but it is thoroughly
evil and a form of savage brutality. However, the doc¬
trine of Hell does not justify in any way the attributing
of cruelty to God.

58. He who sentences even the vilest creature to
eternal torture is more cruel than the most cruel of
men.

Cruelty is the infliction of punishment upon the inno¬
cent or beyond due measure upon the guilty. God is
not cruel. He is just. When you mention cruelty, you
unconsciously make appeal to the sentiment of human
pity. Now, we pity involuntary evils. We pity the one
who suffers involuntarily. We pity criminals who re¬
pent and try to make good. We pity them even before
they repent if we feel that there is yet hope that they
may do so. But we do not pity the man who hardens
himself in his evil intentions — won’t repent, but tells

GOD AND GOOD EXAMPLE

21

US that he is going on with his malicious practices, no
matter what we say, A mother who does not know
how to punish does not know how to pity her child.
Weakness leads to impunity. And remember that God
sends no one to Hell. Men go there. God does not
want them to go there, otherwise His warning us that
there is a Hell would be absurd.

59. One who believes in Hell cannot understand the
horrible nature of the vice of cruelty, not fearing to
cast a reflection on God.

I believe in the existence of Hell. I am not in the
least likely to regard that doctrine as implying cruel¬
ty in God, nor do I think I have a lower estimate
of the horrible nature of cruelty than you. The God
I serve abominates it, and will punish willful and
serious and unrepented cruelty to one’s fellows by
Hell forever. Even you don’t hate it that much.

60. God should set a good example to men.

He does so. Your complaint is that He manifests too
great -a love for the good and too great a corresponding
hatred of evil. You want Him to sanction evil, and
tell men that He doesn’t mind so very much if they
do sin.

61. It is an outrage on Christian sympathy to all
who realize what Hell really is.

What Hell really is, will never be realized by human
intelligence in this life. The fact that there is a Hell
is known because God has revealed its existence. And
is it an outrage on Christian sympathy to think that
God’s strict rights will be vindicated? If a man has
any Christian sympathy, it goes out to Christ above
all, dying in great suffering upon the cross precisely
to save men of good will from the eternal punishment
of Hell — and he does not sympathize with those who
blaspheme and despise Christ, and fling back into God’s
face this love-offering of His own Son. No man can
deliberately reject God’s love and have it.

62. You talk of injustice, but you seem to have for¬
gotten the mercy of God.

I have not forgotten the mercy of God. But you
have forgotten that mercy is begged for, not forced
upon people against their will. God will mercifully
pardon anything, on sincere repentance: nothing with¬
out it. ’Tliere is room for pardon, but not for impunity.

63. But how could a merciful God send anyone to
Hell?

God sends no one to Hell. Fools go there. God warns
us against Hell very seriously. If He wished us to

22

WHY CREATE AND THEN PUNISH?

go there, the last thing He would do would be to warn
us against it. But none of these difficulties can avail
against the fact. As surely as good and evil exist in
this world, so do their counterparts in eternity — Heaven
and Hell. And, above all, since God has said that there
is a Hell, there is no use in urging our ideas as to
whether there should be one or not. It is better to
give our attention to the living of a life which cannot
end in Hell. As Fr. Rickaby has pointed out, “There
is only one way to abolish Hell; abolish your own
by a good life.”

64. Would it not be better not to create, than to
punish some soul forever in Hell?

Even did that seem better to us, our little ideas are
not in the measure of all that is truly wise. Creation
is a fact. Hell is a fact. That souls can be lost is a
fact. If we find it hard to reconcile these facts with
our human ideas, we can only conclude that our ideas
must be limited and inadequate, and that God’s infinite
wisdom must perceive more aspects than those to
which we advert. God has, in fact, revealed this truth
in the words, “My thoughts are not your thoughts,
nor your ways My ways.” We are too prone to con¬
centrate on individual details and lose sight of the
whole scheme. God has not to choose between creat¬
ing this or that individual, but He made a race of be¬
ings propagating its kind. And He saw that the general
good far outweighed the individual losses. After all, if
my great-grandfather lost his soul, that would be his
own fault. There was no need for him to do so. But if
he had not been allowed to exist, my grandfather,
my father, and myself would not have had the oppor¬
tunity of saving our souls. There is no reason why
I should be deprived of eternal happiness (if I attain
it) because my great-grandfather chose to throw away
his eternal happiness (if he did). A complete solution
of the difficulty, of course, cannot be given. Man’s
powers of comprehension are very limited. But reason
can at least show that objections proposed by reason
are not valid, and it can also show that wild conclu¬
sions and denials go far beyond any of the evidence
that can be advanced in their favor.

65. The future has no real bearing on morality, and
if anything, would have a bad influence, making men
cowards.

Since there is a future life, it has a lot to do with
morality. Man is endowed with reason and is bound
to exercise foresight. The future as such, whether
here or hereafter, is a reasonable motive for present
conduct. I refrain from eating certain foods now,

RATIONALISM AND HELL

23

because reason tells me that future indigestion will
result. That is reasonable conduct. I try to refrain
from morally wrong conduct because it is wrong;
offends God; is a personal disgrace; and will wreck my
whole future existence if I persist in it, dying without
repentance. All these motives are good. If the nobler
motives fail to impress me in a given temptation, the
thought of hell at least will tend to stop me.

You will say, “So you are afraid of hell?” I reply,
“Of course I am!” Knowing that hell is a reality, any
sane man will live so as to avoid going there. It is
not cowardice, but ordinary prudence. If a man leaps
for his life off a railway line as an express tears past
the spot where he was standing, you would not go
up to him, tap him on the shoulder, and say, “You
coward, you jumped for your life through sheer fear
of that train!” God gave us our reason that we might
use it for our well-being, and it is quite reasonable to
weigh both advantages and penalties attached to moral
law.

Nor is this influence probably to the bad. The
knowledge that retribution will follow violations of the
moral law makes that law a real law. Could we say
that all the penalties attached to the laws of the
State are to the bad? Thousands of temptations to
crime are resisted by citizens because of the thought
of the future penalties. Nor does it matter much
whether the penalty be future by a few weeks and in
this life, or by some years, and in the next life. The
principle is the same.

66. Has not rationalism made havoc of Christianity,
reducing the Bible to a myth, and quenching the fires
of hell by humanitarian principles?

It has not made havoc of Christianity. It is making
havoc of Protestantism. But Protestantism is not really
Christianity. The Catholic Church alone is the true
representative of Christianity, and she is not affected
by rationalism. The Bible is as authentic as ever, and
humanitarianism has not affected the fires of hell, even
as it had nothing to do with their creation. As has
been well said, the only way to abolish hell is to
abolish one’s own by leading a good life, and serving
God.

67. How does Protestantism in general disobey
Christ?

In general it says that Scripture is a sufficient guide
to salvation, although Scripture says that it is not;
it denies the authority of the Church established by
Christ; it has no sacrifice of the Mass; it does not

24

A SUMMARY

believe in confession; it denies Christian teaching on
marriage: it rejects Purgatory, and very often its advo¬
cates refuse to believe in hell. But I could go on
almost forever. Meantime, if you give me any doc¬
trine taught by one Protestant Church, I will produce
another Protestant Church which denies it, save per¬
haps the one doctrine that there is a God of some sort.

A RIGHT PERSPECTIVE

I have been dealing with isolated aspects of this
whole question of hell, proposed as difficulties. But
their very isolation destroys perspective. Firstly, it is
a mistake to think that eternal things can be meas¬
ured by ideas proper to finite men; and, secondly, it
is a mistake to concentrate on individual attributes
of God, such as His mercy, to the exclusion of all other
attributes. As Leibuity, the non-Catholic philosopher,
has remarked, “We know next to nothing of God’s
ways, and to wish to measure His wisdom and good¬
ness with our finite ideas is absurd temerity.” And
our separation of God’s attributes is not justified for
purposes of objection. We must take all in their gen¬
eral connection, balancing one with another, and seeing
each as the reason of the others. God is not just, and
also good, and also merciful. He is justice, goodness,
mercy. In the supreme unity of God these are one.
It is the feebleness of our intelligence which suggests
separation in these divine attributes. If hell, then, is
demanded by God’s justice, it is demanded by His
goodness and mercy also. And if a soul is lost, it is
allowed to lose itself both by God’s justice and mercy.

Difficulties are bound to arise for us. But objections
against the doctrine of hell are not justified; for he
•who objects supposes the doctrine of hell to be false.
And that gives the lie to God, who has revealed hell
to be a fact.

CONCLUSION

There is a hell. The idea of eternal suffering may
not appeal. It does not appeal to me. Yet hell is a
fact, nevertheless. A terrible doom awaits the finally
impenitent, and it is well to remember it. And the
thought of hell should at least teach us the gravity of
sin. Fire gives light. Let the fire of hell give us this
light. And let it harden our endurance that we may
face any trial and difficulty rather than sin. “Here cut,
here burn,” cried St. Augustine, “but spare me in
eternity.” This life is the time of our probation, and
death is the end of hope for him who dies radically
opposed to God. “If it were justice alone,” writes
Lacordaire, “which has prepared the abyss, there

A CONVERT MINISTER

25

would have been a remedy. But it is love also, and
this it is which takes away all hope. When we are
condemned by justice, we may have recourse to love;
but when we are condemned by love, to whom shall
we have recourse? Such is the lot of the damned.
They have tried love too far. It is life or death; and
when there is question of the love of a God, it is
eternal life, or eternal death.”

These are the thoughts which lend weight, indeed,
to Our Lord’s words, “What shall it profit a man if he
gain the w'hole world and lose his soul?” For loss of
one’s soul means hell, and for all eternity. This is
not a thought with which we may trifie. It is basic
in Christianity, and alone explains the passionate de¬
sire to save souls so evident in the apostles of Christ
throughout the ages. And the salvation of our own
souls is equally a matter of urgent necessity. Sin must
be renounced, and God must be served. “Man with his
free will,” says Fr. Rickaby, “may in this life defy
God; but it will not be forever. God deals with man
fairly, never asking back what He has not first given
to man. Nay, God deals with man mercifully, allow¬
ing, even entreating, him to take back false moves.
But any one false move, in downright defiance of God,
may be the last move of the game. God may foreclose
the mortgage of life at any moment, and it is a fear¬
ful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
Your will strongly bent in opposition to His! The out¬
come of such a conflict and collision with an Almighty
Being is beyond the power of reason to calculate.

Augustine Joseph Roth, a former Baptist minister,
tells the story of his conversion in booklet, “Out of
the Wilderness,” Sunday Visitor, in answer to critics:

Among the many letters I received from former
friends in the Protestant ministry, after it became
known that I W'as to be received into the Catholic
Church, was one from Dr. Wallace Sharpe, an in¬
structor of a seminary that I had attended. I do not
question the sincerity that prompted my preceptor to
write me; however, there is one part of his letter that
cannot go unchallenged. If Dr. Sharpe is sincere, he
is absolutely ignorant of what he writes, and I sincere¬
ly hope that this article will enlighten him for the
future. I quote part of his letter:

“You have not been fair with yourself in this mat¬
ter. Instead of going to impartial sources for informa¬
tion, you went to a Catholic priest, and instead of an
impartial informant you found a fox only too willing
to praise the beauty of his own tail. I dare say that
had you gone to other men of intelligence, not neces¬
sarily Baptists, you would have met so very different

26

LACK OF SINCERITY

a story, that you could not, conscientiously, become a
Catholic. The entire student body agrees on this,”

I believe that I was a fairly intelligent non-Catholic,
of the kind my former professor has reference to; and
had any Protestant come to me to learn something
about the Catholic Church, I would have given him the
so-called intelligent argument. Somewhere I had read
“The Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk.” Elsewhere
I had read “Thirty Years in Hell,” by one who re¬
pudiated his book before he died; and at another
time I wasted good time on a volume entitled “Crimes
Against the Jesuits.” Fortified with this abundant
supply of knowledge of the Catholic Church, I set out
to warn the unsuspecting of the dangers of Catholi¬
cism. I had personally purchased and distributed no
less than a hundred copies of Maria Monk and perhaps
as many of the others. Whenever I was asked any¬
thing about the Catholic Church, I tipped back on my
heels and swelled up like a pouter pigeon, for I con¬
sidered myself a living encyclopedia and the source
of all information about the Catholics. At the end of
my discourse, I gave the inquirer a copy of one of
these books, and strutted off like a peacock, honestly
believing that I had accomplished something worth
while.

For years I followed this method of dealing intelli¬
gently in regards to the Catholic Church, and regard¬
less of my sincerity, I am sure that I turned back
many an honest seeker of the Truth, It is impossible
to estimate the number of Protestant ministers, using
this same method of intelligently instructing others
concerning the Catholic Church, and who are keeping
others from the joy of the true Faith.

Their Sincerity Is Not Questioned

The sincerity of these men does not help matters
one iota. I have often heard these words: “Oh, well,
they are sincere”; and I cannot find it in myself to
condone such sincerity any more than I can condone
the sincerity of the thief who steals the savings of
the wifiow and orphan. My own brother, a well-known
Baptist minister, will have nothing whatever to do
with me since I became a Catholic, claiming, as he
does, that I have disgraced the family. My own sister, a
prominent business woman of New York, will not so
much as answer a letter, charging me, as she does,
with bringing shame on her by becoming a Catholic.
Sincere? No doubt; but a sincerity bred of bigotry
and hatred is not to be respected. A man may be
quite sincere, and yet be quite wrong, just as wrong
as I was in taking to heart the sinful lies of the in¬
famous “Maria Monk” — and just as wrong, as I shall

WHAT OTHERS THINK

27

attempt to prove in this pamphlet, as my former pro¬
fessor is in believing that non-Catholic men and wom¬
en of intelligence, are sure to speak ill of the Catholic
Church.

Nor does it necessarily follow that because the fac¬
ulty and the entire student body agree in what Dr.
Sharpe says, that it must be so. I agree that the
majority rules, but I do not agree that the majority
is always right. Let me give one illustration in this
respect. Yonder in prison is Barabbas; here stands
Christ. Now which shall it be: Thief, murderer, in¬
citer of riots, or, Jesus the Saviour of Men, the Prince
of Peace? The majority cry “release Barabbas and
crucify Christ.” The voice of the rabble, the majority,
carried that day, but, who today will admit that the
majority was right? In your own student body there
are Methodists who think you are wrong; there are
Presbyterians who think you are both wrong; there
are Campbellites who think the three of you are wrong.
You cannot agree among yourselves on hardly one
point of Christian doctrine, but you are all united in
one thing, that I am wrong because I became a
Catholic.

Fair-Minded Ministers Agree

You claim that I should have gone to non-Catholics
for my information about Catholics but, the Rev. J. B.
Hemmeon, a Methodist minister, does not agree with
you, for he says;

“It is a strange and lamentable fact that not one
Protestant in ten thousand knows^ the truth about the
teaching and practice of the Catholic Church. Many
do not know that there was any other Christian Church
from the first or second century until the ‘Reforma¬
tion,’ or for about one thousand four hundred years.
And they believe that there was then, virtually, a new
Revelation.

“When a person of common sense wishes to obtain
information about anything, whether political, reli¬
gious, scientific, or it matters not what it may be, he
goes to headquarters for authentic information — never
to those who seek to destroy, or who are the enemies
of that which he wishes to study. Not one Protestant
in thousands ever seeks information concerning the
Catholic Church from Catholic sources. The history
from the Apostles to the fifteenth century is not
taught in any Protestant seminary, nor anywhere else
amongst Protestants, as far as I know. Nor is it pos¬
sessed by Protestants ... I studied theology, passed

28

OPINIONS OF MINISTERS

my examinations for the Methodist Church, and knew
absolutely nothing of Christianity, or whether there
was any, during this period. When I awoke to the
fact of my dense ignorance, I felt resentment; and I
confess I do to this day.”

Nor is Dr. Hemmeon alone in his opinion. Says Dr.
Washington Gladden, a Congregationalist of Columbus,
Ohio:

‘‘Among non-Catholics, even men of education are
woefully ignorant of the Catholic Church.”

And Dr. Nightengale, a Methodist, in his, ‘‘Religions
of All Nations,” has this to say:

‘‘In scarcely a single instance has a case concerning
them (Catholics) been fairly stated; the channels of
history, not grossly corrupted.”

But it is not my wish to show you how many men
of intelligence among the non-Catholic clergy, dis¬
agree with you. I wish to show you and those who
share your opinion, that non-Catholics of intelligence,
have been most outspoken in their praise of the
Catholic Church, and that Protestant ministers and
well-known laymen, have been most outspoken in
voicing their disapproval of the Protestant Church.
Let us hear what informed non-Catholics have to say.

Well-Informed Ministers Speak Out

Rev. A. M. Courtney, a Methodist, of Chillicothe,
Ohio:

‘‘If I could destroy the Catholic Church tomorrow as
easily as I could turn over my hand I .should not do
so, for it has a great mission to perform and it per¬
forms it as the Protestant Church could not do. It
finds a place for every person, be he the religious
enthusiast, the worker for mercy, the distributor of
charity, or the recluse. It places these persons where
they may do the most good, and that the Protestant
Church does not do. Its writers and theologians,
Thomas Aquinas, for instance, are the font of inspira¬
tion to all Christianity and its organization is the most
perfect in existence. The Protestant Church owes all
that is best in it to the Catholic Church.”

Rev. T. B. Thompson, Congregationalist minister of
Chicago, Ill.:

‘‘To contemplate her history is to admire her. Ref¬
ormations, wars, empires, and kingdoms have been
arrayed against her. After all these centuries she
stands so strong and so firmly rooted in the lives of
millions that she commands our highest respect. As
an institution she is the most splendid the world has

A METHODIST SPEAKS

29

ever seen. Governments have risen and gone to the
grave of nations since her advent. Peoples of every
tongue have worshipped at her altars . . . The Roman
Catholic Church has stood solid for law and order . . .
When she speaks, legislators, statesmen, politicians,
and governments stop to listen, often to obey. In the
realm of worship her ministry has been of the high¬
est . . . her cathedrals are the shrines of all pilgrims.”

Rev. James Benninger, a Methodist of Wilkes-Barre,
Pa.:

“The reason the Catholic Church succeeds, in spite
of our misgivings, is because she is true to the central
fact of revelation. She makes the death of Jesus the
center of her devotion, around that point she organ¬
izes all her activities. When you see a company of
Catholic people on the way to church, you can be
assured of this: they are not going for the sake of
fine music; they are not going to hear an eloquent
dissertation on ‘Dr. Jekyl or Mr. Hyde.’ They are going
to that place of worship to attend Mass. What is the
celebration of the Mass? It is what we call the cele¬
bration of the Lord’s Supper. That fact is kept promi¬
nently before the mind of every Catholic. What is
the first thing you see as you approach the Catholic
Church? A cross. What is the first thing you see as
you enter that church? A cross. What is the first
thing you see a Catholic do as he seats himself in
that church? Make the sign of a cross. What is the
last thing held before the eyes of a dying Catholic?
A cross. He comes into the Church in childhood im¬
bued with the death of Jesus; he goes out of the world
thinking of the death of Jesus.”

Rev. Madison C. Peters, a Baptist minister of New
York, N. Y.;

“Catholics teach us a lesson of constant attendance
upon public worship. Protestants go when the weather
is just to their liking. Who has not heard early on
Sunday mornings the tramp, tramp, of people, with
a hard week’s work behind them, while we are asleep,
hastening to the Catholic Church, with prayer book
in hand? . . . Our religion is too much talk. We have
too many women’s meetings and not enough Sisters of
Charity.”

Rev. J. S. Thompson, Independent Church, Los An¬
geles, Cal.:

“The providential purpose of the Roman Church is
unity and continuity. The Catholic Church is the
grandest organization in the world. It has a place of
consecrated duty for all types or groups of mind. The
poor, the common, and the rich meet together in that

30

A CONGREGATIONALIST

Church, as children of the same common Father. The
poor, hard-working man and woman are found in that
Church. It is an ancient Church. It was the ancient
Church before the birth of Protestantism. It has
cohesion and unity and continuity. The very fact of
its great age is proof of its providential purpose. It
traces its descent to the founder of our common
Christianity. The gates of Hades have not been able
to destroy it. It stands today a victor over the opposi¬
tion of centuries. It is the strongest religious force in
Christendom.”

Rev. Dr. T. Moifatt, a Congregationalist of Newark,
N. J.:

“What do I admire in the Catholic Church? There
are seven things which the Protestant Church might
imitate and which I admire in the Catholic Church,
and they are these: First, emphasis of the sanctity of
the marriage vow; second, the pomp and dignity and
parade of the Church; third, the central unifying au¬
thority of the Church; fourth, the tone of conviction;
fifth, femininity, as exemplified in the honor paid the
Blessed Virgin Mary; sixth, purgatory; and lastly, con¬
fession.”

Rev. B. P. Dimmick, a Methodist, of Columbus, Ohio:

“For centuries the Roman Church was the only or¬
ganized representation of Christianity in the world.
During all this time she stood as a bulwark of defense
against all foes that assaulted our holy Christianity.
But for her, the Church of God would have perished
from off the earth. During all the centuries of dark¬
ness and heathenism in the world, this Church pre¬
served the essentials of the doctrines of Christianity.
We have the fundamentals of Christian doctrine, such
as belief in One True God and His Son, Jesus Christ,
our Blessed Lord. A Church that has given the world
the example of so many holy saints as the Roman
Church has made a contribution to the uplift of the
race that is incalculable.”

Rev. N. Schuyler, Protestant Episcopal, of Trenton,
N. J.:

“Roman Catholicism lays great stress upon the per¬
formance of outward acts, while Protestantism affects
to make light of such things. In this attitude I am
firmly convinced that Roman Catholicism is right and
Protestantism wholly wrong. A genuine religion must
manifest itself in some outward way.”

Non-Catholic Laymen Also Speak Fairly

So far I have quoted only non-Catholic ministers.
The list is not exhausted by far, but space will not

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER

31

permit more here. However, there are others who
have been no less outspoken and among these are:

The Late Senator (Mark) Hanna:

“There is a crisis coming which will have to be
met and the sooner the better. There is no place, in
this country, for anarchy and treason. In this connec¬
tion I once said that in the day of trouble the United
States must look to the Supreme Court and to the
Roman Catholic Church. I will go further now and
say that I believe the best friend and protector the
people and the flag shall have in its hour of trial will
be the Roman Church, always conservative and fair
and loyal. This is the power that shall save us.”

John D. Rockefeller, writing in “World’s Work,” says:

“I fully appreciate the splendid service done by
others in the field, but I have seen the organization of
the Roman Catholic Church secure better results with
a given sum of money than any other church organiza¬
tions are accustomed to secure from the same expendi¬
tures.”

The Hon, Stanley Matthews of the Superior Court of
Cincinnati, O.:

“I will say that from the study which I have made,
as time and opportunity have given me, of the doc¬
trinal basis of the Roman Catholic Church, I am bound
to say that it is not an ignorant superstitution, but a
scheme of well-conducted logic, which he is a bold
man who says he can easily answer. Give them one
proposition, concede to them one single premise and
the whole of their faith follows most legitimately and
logically.”

The Hon. W. E. Gladstone:

“The Catholic Church has marched for more than
fifteen hundred years at the head of human civiliza¬
tion; and has harnessed to her chariot, as the horses
of a triumphal car, the chief intellectual and material
forces of the world.”

Nathaniel Hawthorne:

"I have always envied the Catholics in that sweet,
sacred Virgin Mother who stands between them and
the Diety; intercepting somewhat of His awful
splendor, but permitting His love to stream on the
worshipper more intelligibly to human comprehension
through the medium of a woman’s tenderness.”

Oliver Wendell Holmes:

“So far as I have observed persons nearing the end
of life, the Roman Catholics understand the business

32

RENAN

of dying better than Protestants. I have seen a good
many Roman Catholics on their deathbeds and it al¬
ways appeared to me that they accept the inevitable
with composure which showed that their belief, wheth¬
er or not the best to live by, was a better one to die
by than most of the harder ones that have replaced it.”

The great metaphysician, Heine, in his “Confessions,”
says:

“I know too well my own intellectual caliber not
to be aware that, with my most furious onslaughts, I
could inflict but little injury on such a Colossus as the
Church of St. Peter. Many a new recruit will break
his head against its walls. As a thinker, a metaphysi¬
cian, I was always forced to pay the homage of my
admiration to the logical consistency of the doctrines
of the Roman Catholic Church.”

Even Renan, writing from Rome in 1849, says:

“I came to this country singularly prejudiced against
the religion of the south. I had in my mind set
phrases as to this sensual, unwholesome, and subtle
worship. To me Rome was the perversion of the re¬
ligious instinct. I intended to ridicule freely the
permanental ingenuity of the Church of Christ and of
the superstitious of this land. Well, my friend, the
Madonna has conquered me.”

RADIO REPLIES

f

In Defence of Religion

Given from the Catholic Broadcasting Station 2SM

Sydney, Australia

by

THE REV. DR. RUMBLE, M.S.C.

Revision of Australian edition for American readers by
REV. CHARLES MORTIMER CARTY
Preface by Rt. Rev. Msgr. Pulton J. Sheen, D.D.

1588 QUESTIONS and ANSWERS

ON CATHOLICISM AND PROTESTANTISM
EXPOSE' OF JEHOVAH WITNESSES

This book is now widely used as a text and reference
book in Study Clubs, High Schools, Colleges, Uni¬
versities, Newman Clubs, Novitiates, Seminaries and
Hospitals.

A book for the uninformed Catholic — the educated and
uneducated lapsed Catholic and Prospective Coijvert.

WIDE CIRCULATION AT MISSIONS AND RETREATS

For copies address your order directly to

REV. CHARLES M. CARTY

“Radio Repues”

St. Paul, Minnesota, U. S. A.

fcOc for paper cover edition . . . 40c each for orders of
10, 24 and 50 copies . . . 35c per 100.
jl.OO for cloth de luxe ediiion,

Pl«;LSe order in quantities of 10, 24, 50 and 100 fur

lot shipments.

6

CATHOLIGETICS

A Series of Booklets on Most Common

Booklet ISo. 1

BIBLE Ouiaaes to a Street Preacher

A * 'll

Booklet No, 2

PURGATORY to > Street Preacher'

Booklet No, 3

INDULGENCE Qnlaaes to a Street Preacher

Booklet No, 4

CONFESSION Qniaaes to a Street Preacher

Booklet No, 5

MARRIAGE Qniaaes to a Street Preacher

* i

Booklet No, 6

HELL Qniaaes to a Street Preacher

Boolet No, 7

BIRTH PREVENTION Quiues to a Street

Preacher

Booklet No, 8

EUCHARIST Qniaaes to a Street Preacher

Booklet No, 9

TRUE CHURCH Qniaaes to a Street Preacher

Bitoklet No, 10

VIRGIN AND IDOL WORSHIP Qniaaes to
Preacher

a Street

These are all VEST POCKET BOOKLETS
of 30 or more pages of material packed
with a bite, a punch, and weighted with
compact information. There is no ver¬
bosity and prolonged tracts to read before
getting the meat and kernel of theology
in the answer. Street preaching has
proved that people prefer qulx form to
lecture form — the naked truth in a few
words without the trimmings of wasted
narrative form.

BE A CAMPAIGNER FOR CHRIST hj imitating yowr
literatare-xpreading enemies and spread the printed word.

Single copy, 10c ; 2S for $2.25 ; 50 for $4.00
100 or 10 of each, $6.00} 1,000 for $40.00
Order from

REV. CHARLES M. CARTY

“RADIO REPLIES”

ST. PAUL, MINN., U. S A.

Use Booklet Number for Telegram Order$

Mk